1 Cor 14:34-35 and the Role of Women in the Church

Introduction

The daughters of Philip prophesied (Acts 21:9). At Pentecost, Mary the mother of Jesus and other women were filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke in tongues (Acts 1:13, 2:1-4, 17), probably in the upper room that served as the earliest house-church (Acts 1:13; cf. 2:46; 12:12). Paul stipulates a covering be worn by those women (wives?) at Corinth who prophesied, apparently publicly (1 Cor 11:5).[1] In the light of these examples of women being prompted by the Spirit to speak, apparently in church, how are we to understand Paul’s instruction that “women should keep silent in the churches” (1 Cor 14:34 [ESV]). Taken out of context these words would be an absolute prohibition that would be inconsistent with the examples noted above. It is therefore necessary to examine how these words are conditioned by their context. In this essay, I wish to explore how to interpret 1 Cor 14:34-35 in the context, both of the neighbouring verses and of the letter as a whole.

For completeness it is worth mentioning two theories that I believe have little merit. The first is the proposal that 1 Cor 14:34-35 is a later interpolation.[2] There is no extant manuscript that omits these verses;[3] the transposition of these verses after v. 40 occurs only in a group of closely related manuscripts.[4] To argue for interpolation is to abandon sound textual criticism. The second is the proposal that vv. 34-35 are Paul’s quotation of the Corinthians’ letter.[5] Whilst it is true that Paul is responding to information he has been sent (1 Cor 1:11; 7:1) and does quote from these sources (e.g. 6:12, 13; 10:23), the particle  (“What?” v. 36 [KJV]) will not bear the weight placed upon it by these commentators. This disjunctive particle does not dismiss the preceding clause but introduces a contrasting statement that supports the preceding one and is better translated “or” (cf. Rom 3:29).[6] Correctly read, v. 36 does not contradict the preceding verses but contrasts it with an alternative, i.e. that the Corinthians originated and alone received the inspired word. Neither of these theories excuses us from interpreting these as the words of Paul, who believes he is giving commands of the Lord (v. 37).

I will propose that Paul is addressing married women (wives) at Corinth and asking them to refrain from one particular practice that was causing disruption during the services.

Order

1 Cor 14:34-35 forms part of a section about order within church services. Paul introduces this theme in v. 26, writing “when you come together, each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation. Let all things be done for building up” [ESV]. Some of these are spiritual gifts, some are not (at least, not exclusively so). Though the first examples Paul considers are spiritual gifts (tongues v. 27-28; prophesy vv. 29-32), this introduction makes clear that all aspects of the church service are in view. This point is reinforced by v. 40, where Paul summarizes “all things should be done decently and in order”. In this context, vv. 34-35 should be read as an issue of church order; the implication is that the way women were speaking disrupted that order.

“Submission”

Paul writes that women are to

“be in submission [hypotassesthosan]” (v. 34 [ESV]), that is subject to something or someone. Earlier Paul has said that “the spirits of prophets are subject [hypotassetai] to prophets” (v. 32 [ESV]).

In v. 34 it is not mentioned to who or what women are to be subject to. It is possible that Paul means that women are to be subject to the commandments (cf. Rom 8:7; 10:3) or, that like all believers, women are to submit themselves to their fellow believers (cf. Eph 5:21). The more likely alternative is that Paul is referring to relationship between wives and their husbands (cf. Eph 5:22-24; Col 3:18).

“As the Law also says”

Paul does not quote any passage so we are left to speculate which part of the Law he is referring to. We would naturally assume “the Law” meant the Torah, though in v. 21 Paul cites Isaiah as “the Law” suggesting this phrase might imply “the Law and the Prophets”. Even with this expanded scope, it is not easy to identify which passage Paul is thinking of. M. Edgecombe suggests “the reference is generally to the consistent pattern of teaching throughout the Old Testament”.[7] M. Lewis mentions Adam’s creation, the curse, the precepts of the Law and the prophets “who rebuked Judah because ‘women rule over them’”.[8] Carson argues that Paul did not explicitly quote a passage because he had already referred to the passage he has in mind, namely Gen 2:20b-24 (cf. 1 Cor 11:8-9);[9] yet neither Genesis 2 nor 1 Corinthians 11 mention women being subject to men. Perhaps the closest wording we find in the Law is the curse, “your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you” (Gen 3:16). The curse does not describe women in general being subject to men in general, but each wife being subject to her own husband.

Women / Wives

Most versions translate hai gynaikes in v. 34 as “the women” (ESV, NIV, NKJV, and NRSV). However gyne can refer both to a woman and a wife; the meaning is determined by context. Whilst when used of wives gyne is often accompanied by a pronoun or proper name in the genitive, there are examples where gyne alone is used to refer to a married woman. The prime example is 1 Corinthians 7, where throughout the passage Paul uses gyne, in singular and plural, to refer to married women without an accompanying pronoun; other examples include Eph 5:22-24 and Col 3:18.

In 1 Cor 14:35 Paul uses the phrase tous idious andras (“their own husbands”). Elsewhere in the NT when this phrase is used with gyne, gyne refers to married women (Eph 5:22-24; Col 3:18; 1 Pet 3:1-5). There seems no justification for translating hai gynaikes differently in 1 Cor 14:34.

“Speak”

The word “speak” here is laleo. In classic Greek this was the term for familiar speech and so meant “to prattle” or “to babble”, often referring to the sound of talking.[10] In the NT it does not usually carry this disparaging sense. It is used to refer to inspired speech (cf. Matt 10:20; Mark 16:17; Luke 1:70; Acts 2:4; 1 Cor 12:3; Heb 1:1), but is also used in a range of other instances, including childish speech (1 Cor 13:11), unintelligible speech (1 Cor 14:11), foolish talk (2 Cor 11:17) and gossip (1 Tim 5:13). Indeed, laleo seems to be a general word meaning “speak” or “talk”, that ability to make sounds which the dumb do not have (cf. Matt 9:33; Luke 1:20). It does not seem possible to draw any significance from the use of this word.

“Keep Silent”

The word sigatosan (“keep silent” v. 34 [ESV]) is used twice earlier in this chapter. Paul writes regarding speaking in tongues that “if there is no one to interpret, let each of them keep silent [sigato] in church” (v. 28). Similarly, regarding giving revelations, “if a revelation is made to another sitting there, let the first be silent [sigato]” (v. 30). Though the word sigato is used, there is no absolute prohibition against speaking. Rather the prohibition against speaking is circumstantial and relates only to kind of speaking in view, i.e. speaking in tongues or giving revelation. When the same word is used in v. 34 it is reasonable to ask whether there are also specific circumstances in view here. These circumstances seem to be described in v. 35.

“Desire to Learn”

If we took v. 35 out of context it would read as an absolute prohibition against women learning [mathein] in church. Yet Paul has already instructed the Corinthians to prophesy in turn “so that all may learn [manthanosin]” (v. 31). The learning mentioned in v. 35 must be conditioned by the context supplied by the rest of the verse. Women who desire to learn should “ask their husbands at home”, indicating that the type of learning in view is not that received by listening to a prophet but that received by one-to-one enquiry. Consequently the learning (and speaking entailed) that Paul is prohibiting here is that one-to-one enquiry.

“Shameful”

Paul says it is “shameful [aischron] for a woman to speak in church” (v. 35 [ESV]). He used the same word earlier to describe the shame a woman might feel about being shorn (1 Cor 11:6), presumably because of the sexual immorality implied by a shaven head in that culture.[11] In Eph 5:12 Paul uses the same word, saying “it is shameful [aischron] even to speak of the things that they do in secret” [ESV], referring to the sexual immoral and covetous (Eph 5:3-5). However, this word does not refer necessarily to sexual immorality, or sins of that order, and can be used of social embarrassment (cf. Luke 16:3). The word “for” [gar] connects v. 35b to v. 35a implying that the talking Paul considered disgraceful was asking questions in church.

A Proposal

From the preceding analysis there seem to be two implications. Firstly, Paul seems to be specifically addressing married women in 1 Cor 14:34-35. Secondly, Paul seems to be addressing the circumstance of one-to-one enquiry. Given that Paul is responding to a letter from the Corinthians, he may well be commenting directly on an issue they have raised. Two scholars outline possible scenarios:

The scenario we envision is as follows. During the time of the weighing of the prophet’s utterances, some of the wives, who themselves may have been prophetesses and entitled to weigh verbally what was said, were asking questions that were disrupting the worship service. The questions themselves may have been disrespectful or they may have been asked in a disrespectful manner. The result was chaos.[12]

What is almost certainly in view is that the women are interrupting the Scripture exposition with questions. This would have caused an affront to more conservative men or visitors to the church, and it would have also caused a disturbance to the service due to the nature of the questions.[13]

Carson objects to this kind of interpretation, asking why, under these scenarios, Paul would single out just women (or just wives).[14] C. S. Keener suggests that women are more likely to have been uneducated, and thus were the ones asking the questions. B. Witherington argues that women are mentioned here simply because in Corinth women “were the cause of the problem”. The difference between Keener and Witherington, on the one side, and Carson, on the other, is that the former believe Paul is addressing a specific problem at Corinth whereas the latter believes Paul is giving a general regulation. Clearly if Paul is giving a general regulation, it would be strange for Paul to single out women for being uneducated (in general) or disruptive (in general).[15]

General or Specific

There are two reasons we might take 1 Cor 14:34-35 to be a general regulation: v. 33b and vv. 36-38. It is often argued that v. 33b introduces v. 34 rather than closing v. 33a, that is, “as in all the churches of the saints, the women should keep silent in the churches” (ESV; cf. ASV, GNB, HCSB, NRSV, RSV).[16] This paragraph-break is followed in UBS4 but not in editions by Westcott & Hort, Scrivener or SBL (cf. KJV, NASB, NIV, NKJV, and NLT). It is reasoned that the meaning of “for God is not a God of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints” is unclear, whereas the alternative scans better. Yet the alternative has its own inelegance due to the repetition of “churches”. Neither reading is beyond salvage so it is difficult to decide the matter on these grounds. In the ancient manuscripts v. 33b is separated from v. 34[17] (which is why vv. 34-35, and not vv. 33b-35, are transposed in some manuscripts). In the absence of other considerations it seems preferable to follow the MSS on this point.

In v. 36 Paul implies that if the Corinthians object to his instructions it is as though they were claiming that they were the originators and sole-recipients of the inspired word, which, plainly, they weren’t. In effect Paul is saying that the Corinthians cannot ignore the practice of other churches. This links to v. 33b. Further, Paul adds that anyone who is moved by the Spirit would recognise Paul’s instructions as “a command of the Lord” (v. 37) so that if one denied Paul’s instructions he would show himself not to be inspired (v. 38). These verses (vv. 36-38) would seem to be describing widespread church practice based upon the Lord’s commandment; if these verses are coupled with the preceding ones then vv. 34-35 must be read as a general regulation.

However, it is not clear that this is what is intended. Paul completes his thoughts with two further lines (vv. 39-40). By saying, “so, my brothers, earnestly desire to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues”, Paul is alluding back to the opening of the chapter, “earnestly desire the spiritual gifts, especially that you may prophesy” (v. 1), and “I want you all to speak in tongues, but even more to prophesy” (v. 5). His final remarks, “all things should be done decently and in order” (v. 40) summarises his remarks in the last section vv. 26-35. Therefore it is inappropriate to read vv. 36-38 as referring only to vv. 34-35. Paul is not saying “women should keep silent” is universal practice and a command of the Lord, but that doing things in order for the edification of the church is universal practice and a command of the Lord. Paul’s theme is things being done in order; the Corinthian wives asking questions is just one circumstance of things being done disorderly.

Conclusion

Read in context, 1 Cor 14:34-35 addresses one of several issues relating to things being done orderly in the church. The Corinthian church seems to have had a specific problem with inquisitive wives asking questions (of their husbands?) during church services. Paul objects to this disruption and asking these wives to hold their peace, reminding them that they are subject to their husbands.